JUDGMENT

The petitioner had suffered an ex parte decree before the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Thiruvananthapuram in ECC.No.57/2017 (Old No.WCC 2/2009). Ext.P3 is the order allowing the application of the workman and directing the petitioner to pay the amounts stipulated therein.

2. Pursuant to the aforesaid ex parte order, revenue recovery proceedings have been initiated as per Ext.P8. However, petitioner had, in the meantime, preferred an application for setting aside the ex parte decree, as is seen from Ext.P5. The claim of the petitioner is that, in the meantime, revenue recovery proceedings have been initiated and still the application for setting aside the ex parte decree is pending consideration before the Commissioner.

3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner Adv.R.Gopan as well as the learned Government Pleader Adv.Sabeena P.Ismail. Having regard to the nature of orders that I intend to pass, notice to the first respondent is dispensed with.

4. Since the petitioner’s application for setting aside the ex parte order is pending consideration for the last two years, I am of the view that this writ petition can be disposed of directing the Commissioner f